Talk:Adolescent sexuality

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 July 2020 and 14 August 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tgarr003.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Adolescent sexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130702042731/http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Brasil/0%2C%2CMUL63630-5598%2C00.html to http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Brasil/0%2C%2CMUL63630-5598%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928011106/http://www.teenpregnancy.org/resources/data/pdf/notjust.pdf to http://www.teenpregnancy.org/resources/data/pdf/notjust.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.topix.net/content/ap/2007/11/report-abstinence-not-curbing-teen-sex
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://her.hepg.org/content/u0468k1v2n2n8242/?p=5f809288df88409fb6ee9ed3e38a4b57&pi=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:55, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adolescent sexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100514190953/http://www.theteencentre.com/forums/ to http://www.theteencentre.com/forums

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:41, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Mass reversions

Flyer22 Reborn reverted a whole bunch of my edits saying that they created a redundant fork with the United States article. However, she also reverted edits dealing with Brazil, the Netheralnds, and other countries, edits that corrected mistakes in section headings per MOS:HEAD (see here and here.), and more. That is in addition to reverting a lot of relevant, sourced content, only some of which was related to the US. If Flyer or anyone else has an issue with any one of my edits, I would be glad to work through it with them. Can we work through them individually? Doing a massive rollback of good faith edits is not very helpful. Thanks. Kailani (talk) 14:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh wow. You're edits are poorer than I thought they would be. Regarding [1]. Citing to opeds in local newspapers? To activist organizations like SADD? To a TV show? To Epidemic: How Teen Sex is Killing Our Kids? Even if the sources weren't required to satisfy WP:MEDRS they'd still be poor. If this isn't POV-pushing I'm not sure what is. Any further edits along that line should merit an instant topic ban. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm not perfect. Let's work together to improve the article. I am also not going to edit war over this. However in your edit summary you told me to "Seek consensus before reinstating your mass changes." I want to point out that I made a series of small changes. You and Flyer both made massive changes. You each obviously found some of my edits to helpful as you both retained some of them. It would be helpful if you could identify the edits you don't like and give reasons why. The quality of sources is a good start. I disagree though that every source needs to satisfy WP:MEDRS. Age of consent laws fall under this topic. You shouldn't have to find sources in medical textbooks or journals that discuss them to include it here. WP:MEDRS is helpful and a good start but it is not the whole story. ````— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kailani (talk • contribs)

Are you saying that 14kb edit was a "small change"? Pretty much every substantial edit looks poor. You didn't just cite "age of consent laws" to non-MEDRS sources - you cited things like "As the frontal lobe of the brain, which houses complex thinking, understanding cause and effect, controlling impulses, and judgment, is not fully developed until a person is in their 20s," which blatantly requires a solid WP:MEDRS source, and like I said I would question the use of the sources even if MEDRS wasn't required - per WP:NEWSORG opinion pieces are not generally reliable for statements of fact. Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:56, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Youre right. That edit was a big one. It was a lot smaller than your 27k deletion tho. I made 20 edits to add material. You made one to delete it all. Idon't want to argue tho. That will take away from working together to improve the article. Let's find some appropriate RS. Kailani (talk) 22:52, 27 October 2018‎ (UTC)

I reverted per what I stated on your talk page. We've already been over this many times. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:30, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

"Brain not fully developed until 25"

Isn't this misinterpreted data? Pendulum Pearl (talk) 05:51, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

In what way? Should I point to academic sources here on the talk page for that matter? I did add "about" here. And like I noted with that edit, scientists state "until the mid twenties," and usually give age 25 as the specific number. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 00:31, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Changed to this (followup edit here) for now. Might simply continue to only go with "25" later. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 01:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Lead image

The current lead image shows identifiable people who might not want their picture used in this context. I propose either replacing it with a generic stock photo of unidentifiable people holding hands (example) or just not having a lead image. Cheers, gnu57 22:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good. Crossroads ^-talk- 03:13, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

The image was entitled "Foto de um beijo.". -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)